Pushforwards in local coordinates

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coordinates Local
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of pushforwards in the context of tangent vectors as presented in John M. Lee's "Introduction to Smooth Manifolds." Participants seek to clarify the mechanics of deriving the matrix representation of the pushforward in local coordinates, particularly focusing on the implications of equation 3.6 and the Einstein Summation Convention.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Peter questions how to derive the matrix representation of the pushforward from equation 3.6, seeking clarification on the justification of the mechanics involved.
  • Peter reflects on the use of the Einstein Summation Convention in equation 3.6, suggesting that it leads to a clearer understanding of the pushforward's matrix form.
  • Brian provides an explanation involving the tangent vector of a curve and the definition of the pushforward, emphasizing the role of the Jacobian in the transformation of basis vectors.
  • Brian mentions that the pushforward can be understood through the application of the chain rule and highlights the relationship between the pushforward of a vector and the basis vectors.
  • Peter expresses interest in the texts used by Brian for studying the theory, indicating a desire for diverse explanations of the concepts.
  • There is a clarification regarding the notation used for pullbacks and pushforwards, with some confusion noted about their directional relationship.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the mechanics of deriving the pushforward matrix representation, but there remains some uncertainty regarding the notation and the relationship between pushforwards and pullbacks. The discussion does not reach a consensus on all points raised.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about specific notations and the implications of the pushforward and pullback concepts, indicating that further clarification may be needed on these topics.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading John M. Lee's book: Introduction to Smooth Manifolds ...

I am focused on Chapter 3: Tangent Vectors ...

I need some help in fully understanding Lee's conversation on computations with tangent vectors and pushforwards ... in particular I need help with an aspect of Lee's exposition of pushforwards in coordinates ... ...

The relevant conversation in Lee is as follows:
?temp_hash=0733a5fbbe29ee146dea39255470a6bb.png

?temp_hash=0733a5fbbe29ee146dea39255470a6bb.png
In the above text we read:

" ... ... Thus

F_* \frac{ \partial }{ \partial x^i } |_p = \frac{ \partial F^j }{ \partial x^i } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^j } |_{ F(p) } ... ... ... ... 3.6In other words, the matrix of F_* in terms of the standard coordinate basis is\begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^n } (p) \\ ... &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; ... \\ ... &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; ... \\ \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^1 } (p) &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^n } (p) \end{pmatrix}<br />... ... ... "
My question is as follows:

How ... exactly ... do we get from equation 3.6 above to the fact that the matrix of $$F_*$$ in terms of the standard coordinate basis is \begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^n } (p) \\ ... &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; ... \\ ... &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; ... \\ \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^1 } (p) &amp; ... &amp; ... &amp; \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^n } (p) \end{pmatrix}<br />... ... ... ?It looks as if Lee derives (F_*)_{ij} = \frac{ \partial F^j }{ \partial x^i } (p) from 3.6 ... but how exactly is this justified ... that is, what are the mechanics of this ... I cannot see it ... can someone please help ... ..Peter*** EDIT ***

It has occurred to me that it would be helpful for readers of the post to have access to Lee's definition of pushforwards, and his early remarks on the properties of pushforwards ... ... so I am providing these as follows:

?temp_hash=7cf974035de97ce45d5835ab2784bf1a.png
 

Attachments

  • Lee - 1 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 1 - Lee Page 70     ....png
    Lee - 1 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 1 - Lee Page 70 ....png
    47.2 KB · Views: 859
  • Lee - 2 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 2 - Lee Page 71     ....png
    Lee - 2 - Pushforwards in Coordinates - PART 2 - Lee Page 71 ....png
    41.1 KB · Views: 882
  • Lee - Definition and Properties of the Pushforward ... ....png
    Lee - Definition and Properties of the Pushforward ... ....png
    36.9 KB · Views: 999
Physics news on Phys.org
I really should not correspond with and talk with my self ... ...
frown.png
... ... but anyway ... have been reflecting on my post above ...

Equation 3.6, I have realized uses what Lee calls the Einstein Summation Convention and so reads F_* \frac{ \partial }{ \partial x^i } |_p = \sum_j \frac{ \partial F^j }{ \partial x^i } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^j } |_{ F(p) } ... ... ... ... 3.6

and so for i = 1 we have

F_* \frac{ \partial }{ \partial x^i } |_p<br /> <br /> = \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^1 } |_{ F(p) } + \frac{ \partial F^2 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^2 } |_{ F(p) } + \frac{ \partial F^3 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^3 } |_{ F(p) } + \ ... \ ... \ + \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^i } (p) \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^m } |_{ F(p) }= ( \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^1 } |_{ F(p) }, \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^2 } |_{ F(p) } , \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^3 } |_{ F(p) }, \ ... \ ... \ , \frac{ \partial }{ \partial y^m } |_{ F(p) } )

\times

\begin{pmatrix} \frac{ \partial F^1 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \\ \frac{ \partial F^2 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \\ \frac{ \partial F^3 }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \\ ... \\ ... \\ \frac{ \partial F^m }{ \partial x^1 } (p) \end{pmatrix}The column vector above is the first column vector of the required Jacobian ... ... taking i = 2 and proceeding in the same way gives column 2 and so on ...

Is that correct?

Peter
 
Yes that look correct. To see where it comes from:

Think about what I said in my other reply to your previous post; you can think of any vector ##v## as the tangent vector of a curve ##\alpha(t)## passing through ##p \in M## at ##t=0##, which when applied to a function gives the time derivative of that function.
$$ v |_{p} = \frac{dx^j}{dt} |_{t=0} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}|_p $$
Now, consider a smooth map, ##F: M \rightarrow N ##. Keeping with this curve-vector idea, we define the pushforward as the tangent vector to the corresponding curve on ##N##. Taking ##\alpha: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow M## to be a curve on M, ##F \circ \alpha: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow N## is the corresponding curve on N.

By definition, the pushforward of ##v## is just the tangent vector to the new curve, which we construct as usual (take the derivatives of the components of the curve, which we'll call ##F^j##, and multiply by the basis vectors on ##N##:
$$ F_*(v)|_{F(p)} = \frac{ d(F^j \circ \alpha) }{dt} |_{t=0} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^j} |_{F(p)} $$
Using the chain rule, on the first part of the right hand side, (and dropping the evaluation symbols)
$$ F_*(v) = \frac{\partial(F^j \circ \alpha) }{\partial x^k}\frac{dx^k}{dt} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^j} $$

Comparing this expression to our original expression for ##v##, we see that we get the additional Jacobian term and a new basis. If you want to reduce the relation of the pushforward of ##v## to just the pushforward on the basis vectors, take ## v = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} ## (for a given value of j). The pullback is simply our previous derived expression but take away the components (set the components =1)
$$ F_*\frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} = \frac{\partial (F^i \circ \alpha) }{\partial x^j} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^i} $$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks Brian ... still reflecting on that ...

What text do you use for this theory ... ?

Peter
 
Math Amateur said:
Thanks Brian ... still reflecting on that ...

What text do you use for this theory ... ?

Peter

Hey Peter,
As with most topics, I usually synthesize from various sources. I prefer this since you get exposed to various different explanations of a given concept (and become more familiar with a variety of notation). I would say that the main texts I'm reading through right now are Riemannian Geometry by Manfredo do Carmo and Differentiable Manifolds: A Theoretical Physics Approach by Torres del Castillo. Also, if you like seeing how geometry is applied to relativity, I'd recommend Wald's General Relativity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Brian T said:
. The pullback is simply our previous derived expression but take away the components (set the components =1)
$$ F_*\frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} = \frac{\partial (F^i \circ \alpha) }{\partial x^j} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^i} $$

I am not sure I understand your notation, but the pullback and the pushforward go in opposite directions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
WWGD said:
I am not sure I understand your notation, but the pullback and the pushforward go in opposite directions.

Ah thanks. I typed pullback but meant pushforward

Specifically, we derived an expression for the pushforward of any vector (in coordinate basis), so the pushforward of just the basis vectors is a simple instance of the more general expression
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K